Abstract
In the last chapter, the different ways in which clinical research has been organized institutionally were presented. In this context, the United States distinguished itself positively from the European countries. Because of several institutional factors it seems likely that the transfer of basic biomedical knowledge into clinical application is more aptly realized in the United States than in the European countries. This does not mean that differentiating tendencies which are present in the development of health research, have been successfully combated and eliminated. Financial strains challenge the existing, favorable institutional arrangements for health research even in the U.S. Rather, what has been achieved in the United States is an institutional order which can at least temporarily counterbalance these tendencies by providing interactive facilities favorable for coordination and communication between scientists and clinicians. The existence of these opportunity structures account for the important role of biomedical-oriented clinical research.
Keywords
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1994 Kluwer Academic Publishers
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
(1994). An International Comparison of Health Funding Systems. In: Structure and Dynamics of Health Research and Public Funding. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-585-28768-3_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-585-28768-3_5
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-0-7923-2777-6
Online ISBN: 978-0-585-28768-3
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive